From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Greg Troxel Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: About Guile crypto support Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:23:14 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1359896146.2754.19.camel@Renee-desktop.suse> <871ucvof60.fsf@gnu.org> <1360032192.2754.61.camel@Renee-desktop.suse> <87mwvisqwj.fsf@gnu.org> <878v6yojxg.fsf@gnu.org> <87sj55bjxz.fsf@gnu.org> <1360576299.5068.20.camel@Renee-desktop.suse> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1360596211 17458 80.91.229.3 (11 Feb 2013 15:23:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:23:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Andy Wingo , Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , guile-devel@gnu.org To: Nala Ginrut Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 11 16:23:52 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U4vEV-00073L-HT for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:23:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36292 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U4vEC-0005Rk-3k for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:23:32 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34643) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U4vE3-0005Ql-Qg for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:23:30 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U4vDw-0008CV-1G for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:23:23 -0500 Original-Received: from fnord.ir.bbn.com ([192.1.100.210]:51998) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U4vDv-0008C8-Ty; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:23:15 -0500 Original-Received: by fnord.ir.bbn.com (Postfix, from userid 10853) id 17088A63A; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:23:14 -0500 (EST) OpenPGP: id=32611E25 X-Hashcash: 1:20:130211:ludo@gnu.org::217qf09stTA5rrbz:000000Qka X-Hashcash: 1:20:130211:nalaginrut@gmail.com::217qf09stTA5rrbz:000000000000000000000000000000000000000002NNh X-Hashcash: 1:20:130211:guile-devel@gnu.org::217qf09stTA5rrbz:0000000000000000000000000000000000000000003DOP X-Hashcash: 1:20:130211:wingo@pobox.com::217qf09stTA5rrbz:0047Gv In-Reply-To: <1360576299.5068.20.camel@Renee-desktop.suse> (Nala Ginrut's message of "Mon, 11 Feb 2013 17:51:39 +0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.130006 (Ma Gnus v0.6) Emacs/23.4 (berkeley-unix) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 192.1.100.210 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:15729 Archived-At: --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Nala Ginrut writes: > On Sat, 2013-02-09 at 16:12 +0100, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: >>=20 >> Daniel Hartwig skribis: >> An issue with the FFI is distros where .la and .so files are only >> available in the -dev package, because then =E2=80=98dynamic-link=E2=80= =99 won=E2=80=99t work >> unless that -dev package is installed (as recently discussed on >> guile-user.)unanimous > > This could be a real issue since almost all mainstream distros packaging > policy force *.so be put in -devel packages. Though openSUSE/debian adds > the exception for Guile, I believe it's so hard to do that for every > packages uses Guile.=20 > Considering Guile would exists in every GNU project (in principle), the > issue may break the packaging policy totally.=20 (First, "all mainstream distros" is only talking about Linux.) This .so=3D>devel does not make sense to me. I thought the point was that -devel split things that people who wanted to compile against the package needed, but not things needed to run. So if a .so is used by a program that has been compiled, then it needs to be in the non-devel package. I would expect that .so generally belongs in the non-devel package, and that the -devel package would have .a and .h. FWIW, BSD packaging systems do not have this -devel notion --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (NetBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlEZDOIACgkQ+vesoDJhHiVwEACgoTfIp/PQ22qcrfdrmN3oHocO MDoAmgKocKx2r3EGw0On4bro0fh1SXmo =hDFz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--